halofandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Halo: Reach/Archive 1
Why? Why do we need a page for a game that may or may not happen to be real? I say we should see what happens instead of jumping on the bandwagon and assuming it's real or that it's by Bungie. - Lemurwolf132 :Let's see here. Bungie made a forum titled "Halo: Reach" on their own forums I mind you, not that you see forums for Halo Wars or Halo: Chronicles. Secondly, why is it that every single thread on the B.net forums that has even a hint of Halo: Reach locked and/or deleted? Is that not strange that something like that, even though it's just "unreal" to you, would have all evidence of it's existence gone so fast? Seems quite odd that it came up right around E3, when we know that they are sending people there in the first place. Sure, it might just be for ODST, but then again...we are an all-inclusive Wikia. Good day sir! ::Subtank points at CT...- 5əb'7aŋk(7alk) 22:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC) :::I know he made the page. I checked its history to see who did. I just don't think it's neccesary, especially since this game may be in some way a part of Halo: Chronicles or is Halo: Chronicle. ::::Well, until Bungie says otherwise, Reach is a different project from that of Chronicles. Which as stated by WETA, development has halted. True (unfortunately but Peter is working on District 9 with Neil and The Hobbit with forgot his name). All I'm saying is that we can't jump to conclusions. But still yes, I agree that we should hope for the best and thank you for giving me a thorough layout of why there is a page for it. - Lemurwolf132 :We never jump to conclusions on here (at least the Veterans on here), and we only make conjectural articles such as this only if the evidence is credible, and verified (like a cover up). And indeed, we should always hope for everything that Bungie or the Halo Dev. Team gives us, and your welcome. Hope Halo: Reach is mentioned in MSoft's Press Conference tomorrow. - Lemurwolf132 ::Since the last 15 minutes or so are always dedicated to Halo, I suspect we'll be seeing an Announcement/Teaser Trailer. Even if Halo Reach turns out not to be real we should have a page on it. Halo chronicles didn't go through and we still have a page for it.(Drone232 13:22, November 6, 2009 (UTC)) :Turns out not to be real? Are you kidding, obviously it's real. That discussion above is months old; back when the game hadn't been publicly announced yet.--Jugus 13:42, November 6, 2009 (UTC) Spartans There are clearly a few Spartan numbers discussed in the trailer (referred to as Sierra #), 259 is referred to at the very end (1:03), @ 36 seconds you hear "Sierra three-two-zero". Videos can be viewed at Halo Reach on Bungie.net. It was removed as "A Spartan's tag must be between 1-150", but is there any source for that besides that ones over 150 haven't been seen? -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 19:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC) I think there SPARTAN II Class II's like Nicole-458 hence the high numbers Pain is Temporary Glory is Forever 19:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC) correct me if i'm wrong, but nicole isn't an actual spartan, wasn't she the person in the fighting game? Sierra is a codename, or call sign, not specifcally referring to spartans, in the past they've reffered to one spartan as sierra....ONE! not everyone.sierra is probably just a pilot, or a marine. not a spartan.-- 23:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC) All I can say is they'd better be 1) Class 2's or 2) a mistake, because if Bungie starts rewriting such fundamental canon, I'm losing all hope in them. And also, Nicole is confirmed non-canon by Bungie or someone --Lord of SPARTANsLOMI HQI here your cries 20:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC) :Since when Sierra means Spartan? It is just a call-sign! Dare's call sign in H3:ODST is Sierra 1 (S1).. so, does that make her a Spartan?--4scen 20:23, 1 June 2009 (UTC) ::Hmm...I had never read about "Dare" before. Although nothing is sourced, which I'd like to go back and read, which is unfortunate. And if you read the article it makes the same assumption that I had made. Sierra actually means "S", and in Halo 3 it is used to refer to Spartan. -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 20:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC) ::: Um.. Dare is ONI, and according to other sites, Dare is Section 1 (intel gathering, unless i'm mistaken), so in that case, Sierra means Section, not SPARTAN -- Zip Loc :I know that at some point in Ghosts of Onyx it was mentioned that S-II training had been suspended after the first class, but what year was it when that was said? Could the program have been restarted afterwards and kept secret from the IIs? :Either way, I'm betting this has something to do with the Mystery Five in First Strike - the five Spartans that appeared seemingly from nowhere, and that Trautmann called "an APPARENT discrepancy...emphasis on APPARENT". Which is not to say that the powers aren't at least stretching continuity to Hell and back yet again. --Andrew Nagy 05:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC) Since when has it been a rule that Spartans can only have tags between 1 and 150? There were more than 300 candidates, each with their own designation before being selected or rejected. -- Administrator Specops306 - Qur'a 'Morhek Honour Light Your Way! 22:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC) :That's not what I remember from FoR. --Andrew Nagy 05:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC) ::I can't cite page references since I lost my copy of the book a while ago, but there were originally more than 300 children determined to be the exact genetic profile needed for the SPARTAN-II Program. ONI couldn't afford to fund the kidnap, training, and support of all of them, so only about half were "luck" enough to get selected. :::Actually, no. There were originally only 150. Quote from the Fall of Reach: “Of course not,” she said with a dismissive wave of her hand. “But we have '''one hundred and fifty' test subjects to consider, and facilities and funding for only half that number. It’s a simple mathematical elimination, Lieutenant.'' :::So, it must either be a retcon, or another class of Spartans.--Jugus 11:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC) :Further thought: if they are part of a Class II, it could explain their absence in the later parts of First Strike; they might not have recognized the oly oly oxen free signal from the other survivors. Edit: On the other hand, this is evidence for the Class I side, although I haven't been able to find the Frankie post in question myself. --Andrew Nagy 19:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC) "Sierra" is a call sign, not particulraly a spartan Sign, Why wouldn't they just say "Spartan-259"? and only 150 spartan IIs were considered,75 of which were actually chosen, My theory is that they're just pilots,Marines,ODSTs...(etc). the reason that no one can find any references is because there are none that back that statment up, Another possible theory states that they are Spartan III Gamma company soldiers.BECAUSE NOT ALL OF GAMMA COMPANY WAS ON ONYX WHEN THE SENTINELS ATTACKED. I would know, i asked the man who wrote the book.BUT the more i think the more i find these statments obsolete because in The ghost of Onyx, before the sentinels attacked they mentioned either the destruction of the first halo or the discovering of the second. i forget. meaning that the Spartan IIIs were trained after The fall of Reach. So i think my Theory is correct, then again, almost all of you can say the same about yours. hope this helps-- 01:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC). : Hang on, I don't think Spartan III's were active when Reach was glassed. -- User:16807 Compunctious Transgression They weren't.Papayaking 02:00, October 8, 2009 (UTC) :They were, read Ghosts of Onyx. - [[User:Halo-343|'Halo-343']] [[User talk:Halo-343|(Talk)]] 16:39, November 9, 2009 (UTC) True, but most of them would have been either dead or still in training when Reach fell. There were only two "active" Spartan III's when Reach was glassed, and they were both helping Kurt train Gamma Company at the time. Kowslayer 03:22, November 26, 2009 (UTC) I was discussing this on another forum... what if the game was 4 player co-op, just like Halo 3, and they used Team Black as the four Spartans. No one can say for sure obviously, but this is plausible I think because ONI could have kept them a secret, and now we get to hear their story. Either that or Red Team, which was my very first guess. What do you all think? --Butsizzle 15:22, November 17, 2009 (UTC) Halo 4 In all of the halo games, why would this be Halo 4, Halo Wars would be Halo 4, ODST being Halo 5, and if this were the case, this would be Halo 6. :Because it's the fourth game in the main trilogy. And I don't really consider Halo Wars as part of the Halo trilogy since a lot of its story conflicts with the main series and it wasn't made by Bungie either. ODST, since it's an expansion pack and technically a prequel, it more like Halo 2.5 and as for Reach, well I can't be positive if it's a prequel or not but it seems like it most likely is. And even though it's a prequel, it's the 4th full game in the halo trilogy because ODST is only an expansion and Halo Wars doesn't count as an official Halo game by my definition. General Heed 20:03, September 15, 2009 (UTC) ::By your definition, huh? I don't mean to be rude, but Halo Wars is every bit as canonical as any of Bungie's products, and as a Microsoft game it's official. Anyway, the Halo 4 misnomer is probably from some Microsoft intern who doesn't know a thing about Halo; read the Candidate Assessment intro page and you'll notice the pathetic writing, too. Halo Wars, ODST, and Reach are not part of the trilogy - period - but they are spinoffs. The latter two tie in more directly with the OT, but, like I said, Wars is no less signifigant. The trilogy is over; how can a trilogy have more than three parts? Therefore, there won't be any more numbered games. The rest will be spinoffs. --"A government strong enough to give you everything you want...is strong enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson 21:06, September 16, 2009 (UTC) :::Well to clarify my stance, Halo: Reach is considered the 4th full standalone game of the Halo Series made by Bungie. Halo 3: ODST is only an expansion so it is not exactly a standalone game even though you don't need Halo 3 to play it. So excluding Halo 3: ODST, Halo: Reach would be the 4th Halo game by Bungie. Halo Wars doesn't count because it is not made by Bungie so it's not part of Bungie's line of Halo games. That's why on Bungie's website, they don't list Halo Wars as a game cause they didn't make it. General Heed 21:52, September 16, 2009 (UTC) ::::Right. It's Bungie's fourth major Halo game. With Halo Wars being a third-party game, it is not considered a main element of the series. Nonetheless, the point of this section is the Halo 4 moniker. As it's obviously a misnomer, let's just stop this debate. The game is not really Halo 4. --"A government strong enough to give you everything you want...is strong enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson 22:00, September 16, 2009 (UTC) Just because it wasn't made by Bungie doesn't mean it isn't any less canonical then the other Halo games made by Bungie. The Halo books weren't made by Bungie, and they are considered canon. And both the books and Halo Wars were supervised by Bungie so they are all canon.SNOR{3} 22:04, September 16, 2009 (UTC) :::::Exactly. I made the same point earlier. Halo Wars and other third party projects are just as canonical as Bungie's work. However, you're kind of wrong; the books were made under Bungie's close scrutiny. They've always been considered Bungie products. The folks at Ensemble were given a surprising amount of freedom. Understand one thing, though; I love Halo Wars, and I get really mad when people dog it for being a third-party game. Still, let's stay on track; this is not a forum. --"A government strong enough to give you everything you want...is strong enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson 22:24, September 16, 2009 (UTC) ::::::Yes, let's end this argument. But I need to make a final point first. If you read some other articles on Halopedia, you will find that some aspects of Halo Wars conflicts with the rest of the Halo Series as well as the books. And the reason why I excluded Halo Wars in the first place was purely because it isn't made by Bungie. Now I don't know exactly why Halo: Reach is referred to as Halo 4, but that reason I presented earlier with it being the 4th full Bungie Halo game is my best guess. General Heed 23:01, September 16, 2009 (UTC) Engine Will this be a First Person Shooter? Will it use the Halo 3 and ODST engine? Teh lolz! [[User:Bioniclepluslotr|'Bionicle+Lotr']] 23:13, October 7, 2009 (UTC) :I believe it will utilise a newer game engine. What genre, we don't know but it would more likely be a FPS.- 5əb'7aŋk(7alk) 23:15, October 7, 2009 (UTC) ::Bungie confirmed that it will be an FPS. General Heed 00:53, October 8, 2009 (UTC) ::: FPS with a NEW engine, think of Halo 2 to Halo 3, that will be what Halo 3 to Reach is. -- [[User:Wr1ghty|''' Wr1ghty ]] talk 07:56, October 18, 2009 (UTC) http://nikon.bungie.org/news.html?item=27453 http://nikon.bungie.org/news.html?item=26951 And then this article talks about tesselators, hull shaders, and domain shaders. So we're getting a new engine, and according to the journalists, it will be awesome. Why do people still keep asking? -- Administrator Specops306 - Qur'a 'Morhek 09:48, October 19, 2009 (UTC) Hmmm... I wonder if the new engine will have new enemy skins. That would be cool. '''Teh lolz! [[User:Bioniclepluslotr|'Bionicle+Lotr']] 01:22, November 4, 2009 (UTC) :I'd say that would be a pretty safe bet.-- Administrator Specops306 - Qur'a 'Morhek 19:13, November 10, 2009 (UTC) In the screen shots, some of the textures are a bit rough( all stretched) but it is a YEAR away from release, its the skeleton of the engine. I trust bungie, they say that their going to update their engine, they are going to do it. regardless, good gameplay wins over graphics, EVERY TIME.- A Halo FB :Yet so many people fail to understand this... - [[User:Halo-343|'Halo-343']] [[User talk:Halo-343|(Talk)]] 22:13, November 16, 2009 (UTC) Elites? Since this takes place a long time ago, will the Elites be ingame as baddies instead of Brutes? Teh lolz! [[User:Bioniclepluslotr|'Bionicle+Lotr']] 01:23, November 4, 2009 (UTC) :I would think so. It has basically the same plot like as Halo: TFR, and since they weren't any Brutes there, it should only be Elites, Grunts, and all that crap. -- General5 7 [[user talk:General5 7|'Go']] 01:30, November 4, 2009 (UTC) Brutes had little miltary role. But yoyu may see them. Mostly elites.--Hunter on Steriods 01:32, November 4, 2009 (UTC) Honestly? I'm sick and friggin' tired of the Brutes. It's all we see now. Even in the ODST candidate videos, Romeo was sniping a Brute unstead of an Elite. I'm pretty sure Romeo would see more Elites and little Brute action.19:47, November 13, 2009 (UTC)SPARTAN-105 19:47, November 13, 2009 (UTC) :Why you guys tired of Brutes? Grunts, Jackals, and Hunters were around the most. I'm sure, you'd be tired of them too. Except for the Grunts, they're always funny. XD I wonder what their next funny lines are gonna be in this game? --Mega Sean 45 04:00, November 22, 2009 (UTC) Leaked Screens! http://i34.tinypic.com/iqv6tg.jpg http://i37.tinypic.com/1zntr3d.jpg http://i33.tinypic.com/taldzk.jpg http://i34.tinypic.com/e8k12a.jpg http://i34.tinypic.com/2z6gm5g.jpg http://i38.tinypic.com/2r3ed8y.jpgp http://i33.tinypic.com/2q9vwgn.jpg the screens look legit and the weapons look like the ones on that easter egg in ODST with the piece of paper on the streets --Charliekrad 21:06, November 5, 2009 (UTC) Did you mean here, or the neogaf forums? Because while spoilers being added to our articles is discouraged because it ruins the buildup for others, it's not a bannable offense. Just clarifying that point. -- Administrator Specops306 - Qur'a 'Morhek 23:24, November 6, 2009 (UTC) UPDATE: looking on the Neogaf forums(http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=378966) there has been some update apparently on the start menu their is a privacy which is not on halo 3's so this could possibly hinting on drop in and out co-op which wouldn't be a surprise since MS has recently patented it there are apparently spoilers there but im not going to post them look at your own risk and someone also said that the weapons look customisable but remember this its only speculation. The perks are supposedly not like COD their apparently more like equipment--Charliekrad 19:30, November 19, 2009 (UTC)